Hike Taxes, Hemorrhage Jobs

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by madanthonywayne, Aug 26, 2011.

  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Result - no one would make more than $1,000,000 a year, and they would be paid in other ways. Companies would install their CEO's in corporate mansions that the company paid for. Their foreign subsidiaries would maintain bank accounts they could draw on in other countries - and they'd go to Paris and spend their money there instead of here in the US.

    Or they'd just leave and take their jobs with them. You can live very, very well in the country in Korea on $10 million a year.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." For every one of those examples, there are a million artists or musicians who die penniless.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Very true.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    No it is not BS. It is reality. I feel sorry for you if you are working just for a buck. The best people love what they do and they would do it for a dollar year, just like Steve Jobs and many others. And guys like Jobs work 7 days a week, there is no "off" time for them.

    The worst people are the ones that are in it just for the money. Those are the CEOs who wind up in the scandal headlines and in jail and/or running their companies into the ground.

    I feel sorry for you Arthur. You cannot seem to wrap your head around the fact the the best people love what they do. And money is just an added benefit.
     
  8. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738

    Well, if my maximum of $1 Million per year wages came into play, it wouldn't affect those people.
    Yes, people who work hard should do well.
    What I am talking about is people being grossly overpaid.

    Some people say you shouldn't earn more than the leader of your country.
    I'm not saying that.
    The president of the USA earns $400,000 dollars.
    That's a top wage for an administrative job. It's a fair wage.
    People creating thousands of jobs are perhaps worth more, but no more than a million a year surely?

    What are they going to do with it?
    Buy big boats, buy a stupidly big house they don't really need?
    What?

    Is that the incentive people need to use their god given brains to work for the good of themselves and their fellow men?
    To be obscenely wealthy?
    To be satiated with status symbols and gew-gaws?
    It is spiritually bankrupt.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  9. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    LOL

    Steve Jobs had a net worth of $7 BILLION dollars when he died.

    http://www.forbes.com/profile/steve-jobs/

    Where did I say any of those people were in it just for the money?

    Oh, yeah, I didn't. What I said was Those who really love what they do and are really good at it often turn it into a pile of money

    No, you just have abysmal reading comprehension since that's pretty much exactly what I said.

    But the money IS important to most of these people, as in the $7B that Jobs was worth, so yeah if you said you couldn't earn but $1 million in the US they would take their talents elsewhere.

    Since this limit on earnings doesn't exist in any other country you couldn't impose it here and not expect a major brain/talent drain.

    Arthur
     
  10. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    So Steve Jobs wasn't worth it to Apple?
    Bill Gates wasn't worth it to Microsoft?
    Warren Zuckerberg wasn't worth it to Facebook?
    Phil Knight wasn't worth it to Nike?

    Really?

    Oh, I don't know...

    http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_Pledge
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annenberg_Foundation
    http://www.heinzfamily.org/aboutus/philanthropies_02.html
    http://www.michaelmoore.com/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MoveOn.org

    Why?
    These people are transformative and personally I like the idea that there are a decent number of very wealthy people outside of the Government, you know, as a kind of balance.

    Arthur
     
  11. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Horsepuckey.

    Few people even die penniless and the idea of starving artists is simply bogus.

    In fact since the world has over 10 million millionaires:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2535361...usiness/t/world-now-has-million-millionaires/

    Your math would work out to 10,000,000,000,000 people dying penniless and that's more people than have ever lived.

    OOPS

    But let's look at just Artists

    Nope, not penniless by any means.

    Arthur
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  12. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Instead of giving these geniuses wages that are more than any person can spend, and letting them either fritter it away or accumulate it until it is so ridiculously high that they can see nothing better to do with it than give it away, why not pay their employees higher wages, now. Today.

    And what about actors, athletes, singers etc.
    Why should they earn so much money.
    Is Barbara Streisand worth a 100 surgeons?
    Of course not.
     
  13. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Well like I said, I think it is good that we have a decent number of very smart people (demonstrated by their success) with large accumulations of money as a balance to the Government.

    And are wages low at Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, Facebook or Google?

    I doubt it.

    The fact is though the people have the jobs they have because of these geniuses and you seem to think that doesn't matter at all.

    Arthur
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  14. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    To the economy she most certainly is.

    http://filmworksla.wordpress.com/20...-heart-of-la-california-us-economic-backbone/

    And remember

    You can make records just as easy in England.
    You can make movies just as easy in Bollywood.
    You can play for baseball teams in Japan.

    Arthur
     
  15. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Should people's financial reward only be according to the wealth they generate?
     
  16. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Well that's not a bad measure is it?

    The fact is we don't have any rules on how much someone can make and probably for a good reason.

    Do we really want the government deciding how much each job is worth?
     
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Unrestricted Capitalism seems to be coming to the same bad end as unrestricted Communism.
    One problem seems to be that money is continually returning and being accumulated by the same people rather than being recycled.
    It is stagnation.
    That's why all these sensible people, seeing that their money is useless to them, and being morally responsible, are bypassing the system, and giving their money away.
    The present system isn't working, is it?
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  18. adoucette Caca Occurs Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,829
    Taking the broad view, yes the system continues to work, it just will take a while for people to rebuild confidence in the system.

    Nor would I say we have unrestricted Capitalism, and our current financial issues aren't related to how much Barbara Striesand makes either.

    It was a very complicated interwoven issue, but fundamentally at it's heart was huge profits being made by both the borrowers and the lenders that made them blind to the inherent risks they were taking and regulations that didn't keep up with the rapidly expanding international mortgage market which allowed these systemic risks to escalate beyond reasonable fiscal levels.

    Greed will always exist but we can improve the regulations surrounding lending and risk relatively easily.

    Arthur
     
  19. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    We are probably not massively apart.
    I am a fan of the Victorian style of Capitalism, whereby people made money by providing needs. Mining, Railways, Construction, Housing, Agriculture etc.
    And by speculating on those endeavours. Risking their capital on projects which they thought would succeed.
    I wonder whether it would be possible now for us to achieve what they did.

    Unfortunately there seems to be a cancer in Capitalism, whereby people are profiting from speculations which have no product.
    Some of these things are worth having, others are not.
    Some people are not worth what they are paid.
    Capitalism has become more complex.
     
  20. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    “… More than two-thirds of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, say wealthier people should pay more in taxes to bring down thebudget deficit, and even larger numbers think Medicare and Social Security benefits should be left alone.
    That sentiment on taxes is at odds with the Republican presidential candidates, who will meet tonight in a Bloomberg- Washington Post-sponsored debate focused on economic issues. …”

    From: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...conomy-for-republican-supporters-in-poll.html

    Billy T comment: Some are beginning to understand that the investment funds the very wealthy have do “trickle down to make jobs,” but those jobs are in China, etc, where the rate of return on investment is several (~4 times) higher than in the US.

    Then the net effect of this “trickle down” is to REDUCE jobs in the US. - Our older, less efficient factories, with higher cost labor cannot even compete for the US market sales, so they close. For example: where was the computer you type on or the TV you watch made? I am old enough to remember watching two US made TVs! (Zenith and National). US has lost all manufacturing technology to Asia. - Cannot even make the first generation of a flat screen display! Asia is making generation 5 or 6 now but Corning does make very competitive "gorilla glass" that many use for small devices you may drop.

    It has been reported that even some Republicans are beginning to understand, but despite this poll, I have my doubts about that. – They are rigidly tied to their “no new taxes” and other dogma drummed into them like religion when young. – cannot learn from the facts.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 11, 2011
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Yes. I'd extend that to "unrestricted anything is bad." The reason our system works as well as it does is that it has elements of capitalism, socialism, communism and planned economy. Our government is a mix of monarcy, representative government, democratic government and a constitutional republic.

    Which is why I'd like to see Ron Paul win the presidency. Pure libertarianism is as bad as any other -ism but it would be nice to see it added to the mix.

    What about it isn't working in your opinion?
     
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You remind me of my demented aunt Arthur. In one paragraph you conceed that money is not a big influencer of productivity and then in the next you make the contradictory arguement that you cannot tax the rich because they would produce less.

    Instead of mindlessly tossing out ad hominem, I suggest investment in a good course on logic my friend.
     
  23. Trooper Secular Sanity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    Arrg! I hate politics but you guys are bugging me. :bugeye:

    I really think that you should watch this video. Sandel explains the libertarian notion that redistributive taxation is akin to forced labor with references to Bill Gates and Michael Jordan. At 29:30 he makes a reference about a fire protection plan that’s equivalent to a discussion that we had in here. It's a great video.

    Harvard University Justice: Michael Sandel-What’s the right thing to do.
     

Share This Page